IBL14: Church Law

The Priesthood of All Believers

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Religious studies

Lesson: 5-10

Genre: Lecture

Track: 141

Dictation Name: RR130CA141

Location/Venue:

Year: 1960’s-1970’s

Our scripture is Exodus 19:5-6, the Priesthood of all Believers. Exodus 19:5-6:

“5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.”

There is a fallacy that the doctrine of the priesthood of believers is just a New Testament doctrine, and that the Reformation brought it to life. Actually, it is a doctrine that goes back to the Old Testament, and was very important throughout the Old Testament and in the early church. The verses which we read formulate this doctrine as the prelude to the giving of the law. The condition of being a priesthood unto God is obedience.

Now before we go further it is important to call attention to the fact that there are different words used for priest in the Bible in the Old and New Testament. The word that is used for Priest in the sense of someone who officiates at animal sacrifices, is never used where Scripture speaks of the priesthood of all believers. That word which applied to the priesthood of Aaron, is never used in the New Testament with respect to Christians, so that when Christians are told that they are a royal priesthood, the word that is used has no reference to the sacrificial system of the Old Testament; it is a different kind of priesthood, a permanent one. One that offers up, we are told in the New Testament, sacrifices of thanksgiving and of service.

Now similarly here, in the Old Testament, all the people, not just the priesthood of Aaron, are told that: “If you will obey my voice indeed and keep my covenant, then you will be a peculiar, or unique treasure unto me above all people. For all the earth is mine. And ye shall be a kingdom of priests and an holy nation.”

Thus, the condition of being a priesthood unto God, the condition of the priesthood of all believers is obeying His law and keeping His covenant. This then, is a basic aspect of the priesthood of believers. Without obedience to the law and the covenant, no valid priesthood of believers can exist. This priesthood is conditional upon obedience to the covenant law of God at all times.

Moreover, repeatedly both in the Old and the New Testament, we have what seems to be a scrambling of terms; not a royal nation and a holy priesthood, but a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. This goes against our natural tendency to associate royalty in the nation and holiness in the priesthood. The point of course is, that the condition of the priesthood already is holiness, obedience, righteousness in terms of the law. And holiness is coupled with the nation in order to make people ever mindful that the faith is not something that belongs off in a corner in a synagogue or in the temple or in a church, but in every place. Most certainly in the nation. The nation has an obligation to be godly, even as the individual and the church.

Then, a kingdom of priests, other times a royal priesthood. Again this goes against our natural tendency, this coupling of the words. But again there is a purpose in this; we are a royal priesthood and a kingdom of priests, because our priesthood is not restricted to the church or to the home, or to those areas of life that we choose to say are holy areas; it belongs to the whole of life. And the kingdom has reference to the kingdom of God; Gods rule everywhere. The priesthood of all believers therefore is a doctrine with relevancy to more than just a few areas of life. Whether it is agriculture, or business, or science, or education, or politics, anything and everything; there the priesthood of all believers must be manifested. The goal was to be a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar or unique people, as 1st Peter 2:5, 9 declare. The goal of this priesthood is, according to Revelation 5:10, and revelation 26, to reign on earth, to manifest the rule of God on earth, in every area. And the instruments of this reign are Gods law, and the sacrifices are the sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving, according to Romans 12:1, and Hebrews 13:15.

Now the believer priest of the Old Testament served as a ruler priest over his household and in his calling. The same requirement holds today. It is an abdication of man’s role that too often it is the women that assumes the religious responsibilities in the home; it is the man’s duty. The man has a priestly responsibility, and he must lead the family in all matters pertaining to the faith.

Moreover, in the Old Testament it was the believers responsibility, the believer priests responsibility, to establish the teaching of the word of God, and organize worship in synagogues. How was this done? Exodus 18:20 gives us the charter for all establishments of local worship in the Old Testament: “And thou shalt teach them ordinances and laws, and shalt show them the way wherein they must walk, and the work they must do.”

Now this verse throughout the days before our Lords coming, was seen as the charter for the establishment of synagogues for local worship, and also for establishing religious schools. And very rightly so, because prior to the giving of the law not only were they called to be a royal priesthood, but they were called upon to establish organized religion, churches or synagogue, and schools.

Now it is interesting to examine precisely how the synagogues were established in the Old Testament, and to a degree still are, although they have been getting away from this, and lax with respect to it. The synagogues or the places of local worship were not organized from headquarters by a hierarchy, they were organized by believer priests. Any ten believers who came together, could organize a synagogue. Any ten men. And it was incumbent upon them; it was a synagogue or a church, because the word in the Bible is really the same; when ten men came together; not when a rabbi came, when ten men came together and organize it. In other words the responsibility was on the believer priests. Today we have reversed it, have we not. Today it is when a bishop or a presbytery, or a conference says: “Go to now, we are going to establish a 1st church, or a 23rd church here in this particular neighborhood.” Then it is a church.

This exactly reverses the procedure that was established in the Old Testament. Now, the number ten was a choice that was arbitrary, but it was basically sound. It kept the priority in the hands of the believer priests, they organized the church.

We know that in the early church it was similar. That churches met in homes. True they were organized only after some apostle or evangelist went into the area and preached to them, but the organization depended upon the local believers. The church had its roots in them, in their faith. This is an important point, because today while lip service is paid to the priesthood of all believers, there is scarcely a church that pays much attention to it.

The priesthood of all believers thus meant what has been called: “An every believer ministry.” Ephesians 4:7 speaks of this: “But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.” All men, having been called in Christ by their regeneration to be a priesthood, each has a measure of grace according to the gift of Christ, and is required to use it and to develop that gift, not to bury it as in the parable of the talents.

Thus the priesthood of all believers is more than just a theological doctrine, it has a very practical purpose, as does the church, as does the state, as does the school, as does every agency in a Christian society. It calls for more than a mere profession of faith.

Just recently I read the statement by a top clergyman in one church who said that it was a sin for anyone to leave a denomination when the profession of faith was orthodox. Now, this is nonsense. It would be easy to go over the list of churches that still have an orthodox profession of faith, I don’t believe the Methodist church has ever changed theirs. The Episcopal church still subscribes to the 39 articles. The Presbyterian, United Presbyterian church only lately added to its confession, so it was technically orthodox until a year or two ago. And we could go on down the list of churches that are technically orthodox. Saint James had something to say about that, he declared: “Thou believest that there is one God. Thou doest well. The devils also believe and tremble, but wilt thou know oh vain man that faith without works is dead?”

Saint James put his finger on it. So they profess the orthodox faith? But faith without works is dead. And it is important therefore that the priesthood of all believers be geared not only to faith but to works as well. It is geared not to the church, but to the kingdom of God.

Doctor Van Til in writing on the kingdom of God has called it: “Mans highest good.” And he wrote and I quote: “By the term kingdom of God, we mean the realized program of God for man. We would think of man as adopting for himself this program of God as his own ideal, and as setting and keeping his powers in motion in order to reach that goal that has been sort for him, and that he has set for himself. We propose briefly to look at this program which God has set for man, and which man should have set for himself. The most important aspect of this program is surely that man should realize himself as God’s vicegerent in history. Man was created God’s vicegerent, and he must realize himself as God’s vicegerent. There is no contradiction between these two statements; man was created a character, and yet he had to make himself even more of a character. So we may say that man was created a king, in order that he might become more of a king than he was.”

Thus the purpose of man’s calling is that he realize himself as a king, priest, and prophet, under God. And dedicate himself in his areas of dominion and his calling to God, and to the service of Gods kingdom. Man’s self-realization is only possible when man fulfills his priestly calling. The priesthood of all believers thus is a very important doctrine. In this day when so much is made of democracy, we as Christians can see the fallacy of Democracy. Because Democracy puts the power in he people, and authority in the people, without dealing with the fact that man is a sinner. But the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers realizes far more than the doctrine of democracy, because it recognizes that it is a priesthood to God. It recognizes that all authority belongs to God. But then it declares that institutions cannot play the role of God. They cannot be the be-all and end-all of life. It is not man’s calling to build a super church, or a super state, or a super school. None of these things can take priority. All of them tend to take priority, and they feel: “We are the key, we are the answer, so all of you people get in and build us up.” But the priesthood of all believers makes emphatic that authority remains with God, but the primary area of action, is in the life and work of the believer. His faith, applied and developed in terms of the realities of every-day life.

This is why our country thrived in its early years, because it was grounded on the priesthood of all believers. When that doctrine was secularized, and made into the doctrine of democracy, then we began rapidly to decay. Between the two concepts there is a superficial resemblance, but a vast difference. Democracy will always fail. The priesthood of believers, can under God, establish and develop the implications of Gods kingdom. It can meet the requirements of Gods calling, and magnify His holy name. Let us pray.

Almighty God our heavenly Father, we thank Thee that Thou hast called us to be a royal priesthood and a holy nation. Our lord and our God we confess that too often we have established and bowed down before idols of our own making. We have made a state, church, school, and other institutions idols and images, and have exalted them, where as Thy priests we should have exalted Thee in Thy kingdom. Recall us oh Lord to Thy calling, make us strong therein, and effectual unto the tearing down of the things which are, and the building of those things which are of Thee. In Jesus name, amen.

Are there any questions now, first of all with respect to our lesson? Yes?

[Audience Member] …?...

[Rushdoony] Yes today the state is making itself into a God, even to zoning how many churches in some areas can be permitted. You do have, on all sides, institutions playing God. Yes?

[Audience Member] …?...

[Rushdoony] Yes, that is a very good point, and you are right. We are by nature so created that we are priests, and men will either be priests unto God, or they will be priests unto Satan. It is man’s nature to bow down to glorify something; he will either do it with the Lord or with Satan or with himself. Priesthood is an inescapable aspect of our nature. Yes?

[Audience Member] …?...

[Rushdoony] Very good question. The question has reference to the fact that you have many storefront and neighborhood Negro churches that proliferate. How shall we view these? It is true that many of these are seriously defective theologically, have very vague ideas about what they should believe. However, all the same we must say that sometimes there is more religion in some of these groups than in the big Negro denominations, which are pretty far to the left and are Civil Rights affairs.

An interesting thing has happened in his area, that I think is most revealing. Africa has been the target of very heavy missionary operations for a century or more now. And the work has been uphill, difficult, and slow. But the interesting thing about the last ten years as the African countries have gained freedom, is the amazing growth of Christian groups in Africa. In many areas the missionary operations have closed down. But now that the missionary work is up to the natives themselves, there has been a burst of energy in Africa that is unparalleled. Now a lot of these groups are very hard to call anything orthodox. They are a problem to, for example the Catholic church, because it has seen remarkable growth, and its bishops are really not under the control of Rome, because they can ordain and send out men and they are doing it with very little supervision from Rome. And the same is true whether they are Lutheran or Presbyterian or Baptist, They are running things themselves. But with all of the heretical and unhappy tendencies, there is a very real amount of real faith that is being propagated and is growing. So Africa is in for some very difficult years ahead, because there are already signs that there will be an outbreak of religious warfare there. Conflict in Nigeria has strong overtones of a war against Christians, in the warfare against the Igbo tribe. So that the vitality of the priesthood of believers has established itself there. There is no getting around that.

We cannot, because there are defects, say that we must do away with (away?) and this is the way that God has ordained. When you create churches from the top, you tend to create a people therefore, who lack any real power and vitality, they are to used to being told from above, every time there is a sneeze. Are there any other questions?

Well, I would like to pass on a couple of things to you which I’ve been reading, first in a lighter vein and then somewhat more serious. I read very recently a delightful book entitled: Warm and Snug, the History of the Bed. And there are many very delightful and amusing passages in it. And this tickled me especially, I would say the most delightful passages are those that dealt with England, and it is written by and Englishman; of a lady in England, very well-to-do who was very much the country gentle woman, very much attached to her livestock, and living on this very beautiful estate, and this wasn’t very long ago, she became a little bit peculiar. It speaks of her at the age of 70, took to her bed with a severe nose bleed. When the doctor came this had ceased, but she now complained of a pain in her spine. On examination he unearthed the cause; a huge rusty iron key, which she had bid the coachman bring from the stable and drop down her back to cure the nosebleed. In the process, the doctors fingers were bitten by one of the four spaniels hidden under the bedposts. His next visit was even more memorable. He entered the manor house and found the stairs covered in planks; and at his patients bedside a cow and a pail. Her prize jersey cow was temperamental, and would let nobody else milk it.

Then this bit about the actor Peter Toole I found very strange, I think he must have stopped for ale somewhere on this hike through the country side. The actor Peter O’Toole hiking from Stafford to London, wormed their way after dark deep into a haystack, becoming only gradually aware towards dawn that it was in fact a manure heap… (laughter) for combined physical an moral discomfort, this is noteworthy, but for purely moral discomfort, consider the ordeal for a certain fellow of the society of antiquaries and his wife, likewise hiking in a severe fog and in search of a secluded dell in which to lay their sleeping bag. Rejecting one spot after another, they grew weary, and in intense darkness they settled for a grassy couch under a spreading tree. They awoke next morning in sunlight, to find themselves on a small green triangle in a busy suburb, already the object of interest to the school goers, and faced with the choice of rising and dressing in public, or cowering in their bags, deaf to all inquiry until night should fall again.

Then in a section on Pullmans, I thought this was interesting, the Pullman car for trains was invented in the United States, very early in the 1840’s. But it was 30 years later before it was introduced into England, and even then for many years no Englishman would use it. In those days, train accidents were not too uncommon. An American visitor found the reason. He wrote home: “These are the first sleeping cars in use in this country, but there is no difficulty in getting a birth. They are exclusively patronized by Americans. An Englishman has a horror of being pitched into eternity in his underclothes, and they don’t know who this man Pullman is.”

Then in a more serious vein I thought this article by Doctor George F. Carter, a very outstanding scholar at Texas ANM University, is very, very interesting. It is the mystery of milk intolerance. I will just read portions of it. “Scholars have long known that many people, such as the Chinese, keep cows but do not milk them. Other people use milk in fermented forms such as yogurt, butter, or (Gee?) and the Africans tend to bleed their cows instead of milking them, preferring to drink blood instead of milk. It has always been thought how variable man’s culture could be. Now it appears that there is a serious reason for this. Most races of mankind cannot drink milk. Negro’s, Mongols, Indians, both the Indians of Asia and of America, say that milk makes them bilious and causes diarrhea. Milk in schools may have to be segregated. The reason is that there is such a thing as intolerance to milk sugar, lactose. One cause is the inability to hydrolyze lactose, that is break down the milk sugar to simpler sugars. This occurs in infants, but is even more common in adults. Such individuals can absorb a little milk, such as in tea or coffee, but a whole glassful can cause distress. Studies of Negros and Whites in America show that 90 percent of the Negros and %10 of the whites could not tolerate milk. Most of these people had drunk milk when they were young, but the Negro’s become milk-intolerant in adolescence. Orientals and Latin Americans so the same pattern, and in Africa it has proven possible to separate tribes as Negro, Mixed, or Caucasoid, some of the Hammites, on the basis of milk tolerance or intolerance.”

And then he goes on to say that this is a very significant difference, and there are differences even within Europe in the milk tolerance. And he makes it clear that this is not environmental. And individual is simply tolerant or intolerant towards milk, and most Northwest Europeans are tolerant throughout life. Most of the rest of mankind develops an intolerance for milk in adolescence. “If Negro’s and Orientals living in the same… living in America have the same intolerance as the people in their original homelands, explanations based on diet, health, housing, and so on seem very unlikely. One is left then with genetic differences. Northwest Europeans are born with the trait of milk tolerance throughout their lives instead of just in infancy, the differences then are not environmental, cultural, or economic, and they cannot be changed by raising living standards or free milk programs. Such findings as these show that racial differences are more than skin deep, but equally interesting, this difference cuts across some race lines. For the Northwest Europeans are quite different from Southwest Europeans. We obviously have yet much to learn about man, and this startling finding of localized milk intolerance should lead us to consider carefully the suggestion that there may be a focus of alcohol intolerance in this same area.”

The point he makes of course is, that this is beginning to show itself up already in school integration, in that the free-milk program is creating real problems in the upper grades among those who have a milk intolerance as colored children do. So that, he says, this is just one of many indications that we must reconsider some of our current thinking which equates all people, and makes no note of very real differences.

Are there any questions before we adjourn? We have one announcement to make, a reminder of the (Sendholdt?) seminar, we have had a very good registration thus far, so if you are planning to come, get your registration in soon. It will be Saturday the 20th, at Knox Berry Farm, the chicken house, from 3-9 p.m., it includes dinner. Yes?

Oh, there will be another meting of the Chalcedon guild, but not a dinner meeting. There will be a meeting on February the 11th, Thursday night, in San Monica, 401 Wilshire. The first Federal savings and loan, in their meeting room. And I will be continuing the studies in Magic and Witchcraft. 8 o’clock I believe, you will get a notice of it but I am quite sure it is 8. Yes?

[Audience Member] …?...

[Rushdoony] Yes. Yes, the Mankind Quarterly a journal of physical anthropology some time ago went into the reasons for the superiority in the sprints, it has something to do with the heel structure of African peoples. So that they have a superiority in the sprints, but not, say, in the mile. In long races there is very much a handicap.

[Audience Member] …?...

[Rushdoony] Yes. By and large those who were brought to this country were inferior tribes. They were sold by Africans, and they were really the money of Africa. A very limited number of the superior ones would be sold to be foremen, but most of those who were sold to be slaves by Africans themselves, were among the most inferior tribes of Africa.

Well, let’s bow out heads for the benediction. And now go in peace, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, bless you and keep you, guide and protect you, this day and always, amen.